Marco wrote:
> <mailto:sschaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >(*) I have found objects, here and there, that I could actually focus on
> >using the microprism. But for some reason they were never objects I
> >wanted to take pictures of.
> >
>
> What objects do you shoot at?
Mammals, mostly -- primarily members of my immediate family. My
original statement was of course an exaggeration (most of my
statements are); but it is true that I rarely find subjects that I
can't focus at least as easily with either the split-image or directly
on the matte (usually the latter). A couple of nights ago, for
example, I was taking a picture of my son in fairly dim light, and I
paid attention to how I was focusing (which was only possible because
he was asleep). I could get a good read on the focus using the
split-image finder on the curve of his cheek, and could focus on his
hair using the matte screen but I couldn't find anyplace where the
microprism was useful at all. That happens often enough that I have
gotten into the habit of ignoring the microprism.
Steve Schaffner
mailto:sschaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
# This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
# To receive the Olympus Digest send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
# with subscribe olympus-digest in the message body.
#
# To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
# listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with unsubscribe olympus in the message body.
#
# For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
|